Using the hastag #economia50, readers sent us their
nominations, we counted the votes and ranked them according to influence
in association with PeerIndex, to reveal the economia Finance Twitter
50.

Topping the list is Michel Barnier,
the EU commissioner who oversees financial regulation. The bilingual
bureaucrat’s presence at the top of the list suggests the significance
of the ongoing EU audit debate as well as the general uncertainty over
the eurozone.

Aside from the influence of Europe, the list is dominated by journalists, with Newsnight’s economics editor Paul Mason coming in at number seven. The energetic tweeter offers insight to the UK economy and the political machinations behind it.

Flying the flag for chartered accountants in the top ten is Richard Murphy,
founder of the Tax Justice Network and an advisor to the TUC on
taxation and economic issues. A sometime columnist for The Guardian and
Forbes.com, he offers his followers forthright views on the profession.

Never afraid to express his opinions on HMRC or the profession in general, Ken Frost rounds out the top 30. Frost writes regularly on his own website and blogs for Metro.

Given her role as chair of the Public Accounts
Committee, which has spent the last month lambasting tax avoidance
schemes used by large companies in the UK, it’s no surprise that MP Margaret Hodge features on our list at 37.”

Wednesday, December 05, 2012

As per Economia there has been a wee bit of an administrative snafu within the ICAEW, that will negatively impact 713 members erroneously given an audit qualification since 2008:

"More than 700 ICAEW members are to have their audit
qualification withdrawn after the discovery of an administrative error
in the ICAEW Learning and Professional Development department.

This resulted in their receiving the qualification although
their audit experience did not match the eligibility criteria. The error
does not affect their ACA qualification or their ICAEW membership.

Letters are on the way to the 713 members who were among 28,000
members given the qualification over the past four years on the basis of
their audit experience. This was part of an initiative, launched in
2008, that was designed to ensure that ICAEW-registered audit firms were
helped to maintain compliance with EU legal obligations which require
them to be controlled by qualified auditors.

As firms had widened their interests into other, non-audit areas, it
became more difficult to ensure that 51% of the partners were audit
qualified. However, there were plenty of ICAEW members who met the
eligibility criteria, even though they no longer worked in straight
audit.

To save the members having to write an extensive and time-consuming
narrative detailing all their audit experience, and obtain fresh
counter-signatures, ICAEW drew on its records for evidence of
eligibility. The problem arose because members who trained outside the
UK or in a crown dependency were mistakenly included when they shouldn’t
have been. Strict restrictions set by UK company law require members to
have gained their key experience for the audit qualification in UK
statutory audit work.

“As soon as we became aware of the anomalies, we contacted the FRC
and set up an internal inquiry,” said Mark Protherough, ICAEW executive
director for learning and development. “We have now restructured the
department to ensure that the right oversight is in place and that this
sort of administrative mistake does not happen again.

“We apologise to those members who were awarded the audit qualification when they shouldn’t have been.”

Those affected members who believe they do in fact fulfil the eligibility criteria should get in touch with ICAEW.

The institute thinks it unlikely that firms will find they do not
comply with the 51% rule as a result of the mistake. However, if they
are concerned, they should also get in touch."

Oops!

How is it this error has taken four years to surface, and has only now been discovered?

Monday, December 03, 2012

The ICAEW and CIOT have announced a fast track scheme to joint membership of the two professional bodies, that will enable successful students to join both bodies within three to four years (faster than using the traditional route of ICAEW first then CIOT).

The programme includes a new paper "Taxation of Major
Corporates" which, given today's PAC report on HMRC and the ongoing media frenzy over multinational tax avoidance, is clearly relevant to those with a penchant for tax.

The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales
(ICAEW) and the Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT) have launched a
Joint Programme enabling students to simultaneously achieve two
prestigious qualifications – the ICAEW chartered accountancy
qualification, the ACA, and the Chartered Tax Adviser qualification, the
CTA.
Those students who successfully complete this
route, which is likely to take three to four years, will be eligible to
apply for membership of both ICAEW and CIOT – providing they have
undertaken relevant professional work in tax and accountancy during
their studies. This could be quicker than if they had followed the
traditional path of training to become a CTA after qualifying as an
ICAEW Chartered Accountant.

Within the Joint Programme there will
be separate routes to qualification for those specialising in direct
and indirect taxation.

Mark Spofforth, ICAEW President said:
“The
Joint Programme is designed for the most dynamic and talented corporate
tax professionals who are ambitious to rise quickly to the senior
levels of the profession.

“Under this new programme, students
complete all the requirements for the ACA and CTA in a way which
considerably reduces the study overlap, time out of the office, and
tuition costs.

“It still enables the employer to be confident
that the student has gained the relevant skill set required for an
accountant ready to advise on tax at the highest level. The combination
of two well respected and high quality programmes will help employers
offer their employees a more efficient route to become tax specialists.”

Patrick Stevens, CIOT President said:
“The
CIOT and ICAEW have worked closely with professional services firms to
create this flexible new programme for those specialising in tax. It has
been designed for students dealing with the tax affairs of FTSE 350
companies or other large corporates from the start of their training. It
also has a route suitable for those specialising in indirect tax.

“As
well as drawing on the existing strengths of the two qualifications it
incorporates a new, specially developed paper, Taxation of Major
Corporates, which has been developed jointly by ICAEW and CIOT. This
paper has a strong practical focus and deals with the kind of corporate
transactions that students will find relevant to their employment.”

Paul Morton, Global Head of Tax at Reed Elsevier, added:
“The
challenges faced by our department are very demanding so we look for
new team members to be highly knowledgeable. We can be sure that a tax
professional who has the ACA and CTA qualifications will have all of the
technical skills needed to succeed in our team.”

ICAEW
is a professional membership organisation, supporting over 138,000
chartered accountants around the world. Through our technical knowledge,
skills and expertise, we provide insight and leadership to the global
accountancy and finance profession.Our members provide
financial knowledge and guidance based on the highest professional,
technical and ethical standards. We develop and support individuals,
organisations and communities to help them achieve long-term,
sustainable economic value.
Because of us, people can do business with confidence.
ICAEW
is a founder member of the Global Accounting Alliance, which represents
around 785,000 of the world's leading professional accountants in over
165 countries around the globe, to promote quality services, share
information and collaborate on important international issues.

Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Be warned, the ICAEW is cracking down on those members who fail to complete their annual self certification of CPD.

AccountingWeb (ignore the misleading title of their report) reports that Robert Pasley was reprimanded and fined £3,000 with £1,100 costs for
breaching ICAEW bye-law 56(c) which requires members to certify their
compliance with ICAEW CPD provisions on an annual basis.

Wrt AccountingWeb's misleading article title, a cynic might opine that were the ICAEW ever to crack down on actual CPD undertaken by every member, it is likely the ICAEW would lose half its membership.

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

The ICAEW have released the results of the Professional Stage Exam sat in September 2012.

A total of 2,972 students sat the September 2012 session. 6,450 papers were attempted in total, with 2,220 students passing all the papers they took. 846 students passed the Professional Stage this session, with 604 of these not failing any papers.

Paper

Entry

Pass Rate %

Business Strategy

1,036

87.1

Financial Reporting

1,193

75.6

Financial Accounting

983

89.6

Audit and Assurance

1,209

88.0

Taxation

1,136

88.7

Financial Management

893

86.8

Evidently Financial Reporting proved to be somewhat problematic for many candidates.

Monday, October 01, 2012

Resources to help you understand Real Time Information (RTI), the automated HMRC process to collect payroll and tax details as wages and
salary payments are made.

In theory it will eliminate annual reconciliations
and end-of-year forms such as P14s and P35s.

All schemes/employers with less than 5,000 employees will start to submit RTI in April 2013; those
with 5,000 employees or more will start to submit RTI on dates agreed
with HMRC between June and Sept 2013.

As per HMRC:

"The move to reporting information in real time is the biggest change to the operation of PAYE in over 60 years.Under real time reporting, employers and pension providers – or agents, payroll bureaux and other intermediaries acting on their behalf – will send us information about tax, National Insurance Contributions (NICs), student loans and other deductions each time they pay their employees. This will enable HMRC to keep more accurate records and, over time, more people will pay the correct tax.So what are the essential facts you need to know?• Migration to reporting PAYE information in real time is mandatory• Most employers and pension providers will move to reporting PAYE information in real time from April 2013• We will write to you– in October to tell you what you need to do to get ready– in February to confirm the date from which you should start reporting PAYE information in real time• Most employers already send PAYE information electronically and information reported in real time will also be sent online. Your payroll software will collect the necessary information and send it to HMRC online• You need to consider your options for payroll. A wide range of commercial software designed for real time reporting will be available from April 2013 to suit employers’ and pension providers’ individual requirements, including some free products. HMRC’s Basic PAYE Tools will also be available for employers who have nine or fewer employees. You can get more information about this at www.hmrc.gov.uk/paye/intro/payroll-system.htm• You will need to include information in your RTI submissions about all employees• We will no longer require the end-of-year Employer Annual Return forms P35 and P14, and you won’t need to send forms P45 and P46 to us; instead you will include this information with the information reported in real time• Employers making payments to their employees by Bacs, using their own service user number, will need to include a cross-reference in the RTI data submission and their Bacs payment instruction, see Getting ready to operate PAYE in real time.What will not change?• The way tax and National Insurance contributions are calculated will not change• You will still need to give employees certificates of tax and NICs paid – form P60• You will still need to send expenses and benefits returns (P11D and P9D) annually• The dates by which you must pay HMRC stay the same."

Friday, September 14, 2012

Insurance to protect you against the cost of enquiry or dispute with
HMRC is available from several sources including Solar Taxwise.

Ken Frost has negotiated a 10% discount on any polices that may suit your needs.

However, neither Ken Frost nor HMRCISSHITE either endorses or recommends their services.

TAXWISE Fee Protection

What is it? What does it do? What do I need?

HMRC as we all know are looking into the affairs of more and more
Taxpayers. Whether you are an individual or a business, HMRC have many
ways in which they can look at your Tax calculations and declarations.

Inspectors look into thousands of records each year, always looking to
squeeze more taxes. If that happens to you, the cost to defend you can
be significant. Your accountant may have to spend a lot of chargeable
time to rigorously defend your tax position and at the end of it all you
may owe no more tax (you could even be due a rebate!). Your accountant
still needs paying. (Here are some recent claim examples).

Having a Taxwise policy in place will pay those fees, allowing you to
let your accountant get on with defending you robustly without worrying
about the unbudgeted cost.

If you own a business and HMRC look into your affairs, not only will the
business records be checked but in many cases Inspectors will look into
the personal returns of the Directors /Partners of the business. A
Taxwise Policy not only covers the business returns but also all
Directors /Partners and their spouses/civil partners.
Having a policy will also give your business access to 24/7 telephone
advice in the complex areas of Health & Safety and Employment Law

If you are an Accountant you may already have a Fee Protection Scheme in
place and benefit from all that having a scheme brings you.

If not you may be interested to know that having a scheme in your practice:

Can generate additional Income

Can protect your bottom line

Can aid client acquisition and retention

Will give you unlimited access to Vat & Tax Advisors

Can bring no cost Employee Benefits for your staff

Many options are available to you from All Client schemes to Client
Decide. Latest options on marketing are all made available to you at no
additional cost.
Schemes are also now available for Bookkeepers, tailored specifically
for the unique needs of a Bookkeeping Practice whilst still bringing all
the advantages that having a scheme in place will bring. It will even
cover your delegated Accountants hourly rate

Whatever you need to know about Fee Protection, be it an individual
policy or scheme, the team at Solar TAXWISE will be happy to help.

Solar can also arrange your P.I. They have really competitive rates on
Accountant & Bookkeeper Professional Indemnity Insurance. You can
obtain a quote and buy online with all documents being automatically
e-mailed to you.

Have you thought about introducing an Employee benefit into your
business, better still how about a product that has benefits for you as
well as your staff. An Employee Assistance Programme gives your
employees access to a whole raft of benefits as well as providing
valuable protection for your business from as little as £20 per employee
per year.

Monday, August 20, 2012

In its haste to congratulate itself on HMRC's announcement about possibly "recruiting" another 1,000 staff for call centre duty, has the ICAEW forgotten that HMRC promised the self same thing in March 2011?

"Three-quarters of the 60 readers polled online by Accountancy Age
said they did not agree with the ICAEW's decision, while 17% were
completely behind the move. Some 5% agreed, but felt the guidance was
too vague, and 3% were unsure."

Doubtless those residing in the ICAEW bunker will be bemused, bewildered and dismissive about the result.

However, those who reside in bunkers would do well to listen to voices outside if they wish to retain office!

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

As I noted on Friday, HMRC have with great fanfare and naive approval of the ICAEW attempted some diversionary tactics by announcing a reallocation (HMRC calls it "investment") of "up to" £34M and a possible extra 1,000 personnel into their call centres.

Whilst the above may satisfy the ICAEW and some naive taxpayers, the NAO
are not going to sit idly by. As I note on my HMRC site, the NAO is looking at commitments made
under the HMRC’s change programme and will report "in winter 2012" on
the service that
HMRC’s "customers" receive over the phone, online and in writing.

Monday, August 13, 2012

Currently, according to the poll hosted by Accountancy Age that asks "Do you agree with the ICAEW's disciplinary stance on tax avoidance?", 84% of respondents say "No, leave it to the tribunals and legislators".

Friday, August 10, 2012

The idea that the £34M (if that is what will really be spent) is new "investment" is utter nonsense. The money, as I have clearly explained on my HMRC site (and as indeed Lin Homer says), is merely a budget reallocation from other parts of the overall HMRC budget.

"Don't be fooled by the retoric, there's no new money, they are only
robbing Peter to pay Paul, there will be some new jobs but the vast
majority will be back room staff taken off working on post to answer
phones.They have spent God knows how much revamping the telephones so we're now connected to the CC system.So
telecalls will be answered more quickly but as we all know not
everything can be done over the phone and written confirmation or
paperwork is required. so the post receipts will go sky high, then the
calls will triple cos everyone will want to progress chase and it's back
to Square One, thank God I retire shortly."

Friday, August 03, 2012

The ICAEW has issued a Helpsheet to remind its members of the terms of its own Code of Ethics and its guidance on professional conduct in relation to taxation. The Helpsheet focuses on the "aggressive end" of the tax planning spectrum and provides practical guidance.

It is sad to see that the ICAEW appears to be running scared wrt the tax avoidance witch-hunt orchestrated by dog whistle politicians and the media.

The helpsheet quite correctly states:

"Tax is a question of law and it’s the Government’s job to decide what legal tax planning arrangements it wishes to prevent."

However, it then goes on to imply that members should take a "moral" decision on behalf of third parties (ie clients) wrt the "morality" or otherwise of legal (subject to a challenge in the courts) arrangements that may or may not reduce their business expenditure (ie taxes).

It would be far more constructive, and beneficial to the nation's finances, if the ICAEW were to set the agenda and push for a simpler tax system which would in effect make these schemes obsolete.

PQ Magazine reports that three
UK-based accountancy bodies are seeking clarification from ICAP as to exactly what is going on.

The
ACCA is looking for a formal meeting the ICAEW "is seeking clarification from ICAP as to what the
implications are for ICAEW students", whilst CIMA said "we are fully aware of the situation and remain in regular discussions with ICAP."

It is unclear what ICAP's response, if any, has been.

It is possible that ICAP have realised that their decision may have been taken in haste, and that they now don't know how to respond.

Monday, July 16, 2012

"A fellow member of the institute wrote to me today, voicing his fears
over the dilution of the ICAEW brand wrt less demanding entry
requirements for members of the profession who qualified in India and
Pakistan.

"I recently discovered that ICAP(Pakistan) members
just need to pass ICAEW 4 papers to become ICAEW members. Moreover ICAP
members do not need to undergo any training with ICAEW ATO.

In
past (until last wk) ICAP members needed to pass ICAEW 4 papers plus
undergo 2 yrs training with ICAEW ATO to become ICAEW member, but now
ICAP members do not need to undergo any training.

I do not know
why ICAEW is giving its membership of other institutes members in this
way. If ICAEW does not want other institute's members to undergo any
training in ICAEW ATO (which is main strength of ICAEW), then I have to
say merger with ACCA is a better option....

ICAEW has given more relaxation to ICAI(India) members."

Whilst the ICAEW may be relatively relaxed about brand dilution, it appears that ICAP are not.

"Thousands
of ACCA students are planning a protest march on the headquarters of
the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Pakistan (ICAP), in Islamabad,
tomorrow.

The march is in direct response to a letter sent by the
ICAP to audit firms allegedly reminding them that hiring students with
‘foreign’ accountancy qualifications breaks Section 22 of the Chartered
Accountants ordinance 1961.

PQ magazine has seen the letter behind
the storm of protest - ‘Engaging a person as trainee of other bodies’.
It specifically says: “refrain from engaging trainees of other
accounting bodies, particularly trainees of foreign institutes of
Chartered Accountants, or any other accounting body of similar nature.”

Social
media sites erupted over the weekend with some students suggesting the
letter must be a ‘fake’. Others wondered if ACCA, ICAEW and CIMA
students would be deemed as ‘working illegally’ in Pakistan. "

You will need to meet one of the criteria to be able to study for the ACA from ICAEW.

Members of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Pakistan (ICAP)
living in Pakistan who have obtained ICAP membership by complying with
its training and examinations requirements can study for the ACA and
apply to join ICAEW.

Members of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Pakistan (ICAP)
living in other countries who have obtained ICAP membership by
complying with its training and examinations requirements can study for
the ACA and apply to join ICAEW.

Students, affiliates or members of another internationally
recognised professional accountancy body (such as ACCA) living in
Pakistan may be able to study for the ACA in Pakistan.

Friday, July 06, 2012

"Michael Izza (CEO of the ICAEW) has published a blog post today entitled "Chartered accountants and tax evasion". Oddly though his first sentence deals with tax avoidance, not evasion, specifically the Times campaign against tax avoidance."

Friday, June 29, 2012

Michael Izza (CEO of the ICAEW) has published a blog post today entitled "Chartered accountants and tax evasion". Oddly though his first sentence deals with tax avoidance, not evasion, specifically the Times campaign against tax avoidance.

He goes on to say:

"I believe that there is no place for our profession in the creation or maintenance of these sorts of tax schemes...

In these difficult times, any ICAEW Chartered Accountants who are
engaged in the kinds of schemes highlighted in The Times need to look at
themselves in the mirror and ask – am I upholding the honour and
reputation of ICAEW Chartered Accountants and am I seen to be doing
that? If the answer is no then they need to ask themselves whether they
want to belong to our profession or not? "

Sadly Michael has missed an opportunity to stand up against the media and political witch hunt that is threatening both legitimate tax avoidance and the profession itself.

Instead of calling for the simplification of the tax system, which would kill many complex tax avoidance schemes stone dead, he kowtows to the pressure of the media and political witch hunt and implies that the ICAEW wants members who offer legal tax schemes which the ICAEW does not approve of to leave the ICAEW.

As Jason Selig commented the other day on the ICAEW Group discussion about tax avoidance on LinkedIn:

"How is this a moral
question?- there is no "right" or "wrong" about paying tax.

Is it moral
to save for a pension or open an ISA or invest in an EIS scheme?

All
of them save tax and if it wasn't for the tax break you wouldn't do
them. A tax adviser is under a "moral" obligation to offer these kind
of schemes to clients and warn about the ramifications, tax
investigation, exposure in the media of actually doing them.

To fail to
offer the schemes where relevant would be potentially negligent.

You
may find them repugnant - as do I in some of the more aggressive schemes
such as K2, and my advice to clients is not to enter into them - but
that's not my call it's the client's - the fact is it's legal and fully
disclosed on the tax returns - if HMRC want to challenge there is a
legal process that allows them to do so. "

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Unsurprisingly of those members of the ICAEW that could be bothered to vote, a significant percentage (almost 20%) voted against an increase in the annual subscriptions.

Accountancy Age reports that of the nearly 8,000 members that voted, 19.8% voted against an increase.

The ICAEW has over 138,000 members worldwide, the turnout of less than 6% is a disgrace and shows an alarming disconnect between the bunker in Moorgate and the membership who live and work in the real world.

Based on the low turnout and (relatively) high vote against an increase in subscriptions, the ICAEW will have its work cut out for it if it is forced to fill the £40M black hole in the pension scheme by increasing subscriptions again!

Wednesday, June 06, 2012

The ICAEW have set up a special twitter account that gives access to a specialist advisory team to support ICAEW members, by providing free
confidential advice on and help with any technical or ethical problems,
issues or questions.

Saturday, May 19, 2012

Five days ago I wrote about my surprise that Michael Izza had not commented on the potential £40M pension deficit in the ICAEW's 2011 accounts:

"for reasons that are unclear he does not say a word about the pension deficit of £40M
that completely undermines that finances of the ICAEW, and is the tail
that is wagging the dog of the ICAEW's drive for new members via its
international "strategy".

How very odd that he doesn't mention it?
"

It seems that I am not alone in believing that such a significant potential shortfall deserved more prominence. Kevin Reed is also of that view:

"MAKING FINANCIAL REPORTING more relevant and easier for to stakeholders to understand has been a long-running issue.

Let's face it - when things go wrong there will always stakeholders
up in arms as to why they'd not been able to predict such a terrible
moment by reading the accounting runes. Conversely, there will be some
clever sausage that looks in hindsight at the statements and figures to
highlight that the problem's been clear all along.

As a non-accountant of the most severe kind - but as a journo with an
interest in these issues - a couple of areas within the latest annual
reviews from ICAEW and CIMA left me slightly perplexed.

Firstly, the ICAEW's pension scheme financial position has been
valued by actuaries as in deficit of £40.1m at 31 December 2011,
compared with the triennial valuation measured in 2010 at a deficit of
£19.9m. This has the potential of forcing the ICAEW to stump up another
£5m and review its pension funding plan. A fall in gilt yields is the
main culprit behind the deficit's degradation.Having traipsed up and down the pension schemes numbers - which
spread across four pages - I admit to originally missing out the figure,
which was included within the narrative section of the notes.

The deficit is mentioned twice within the institute's financial
statements - in the review pages and again in its notes to financial
statements. The ICAEW's summary of its position, the review, is online
where the deficit is again flagged up.

The ICAEW told me that it is satisfied about the coverage afforded to
the deficit, and its potential ramifications, within its year-end
statements. Note the ‘potential', as the valuation itself was a
‘desktop' valuation, or estimate.

While I don't pretend to be able to pull out the institute's various
pension scheme calculations through its statements of financial position
(or balance sheet as I'd know it), particularly as ICAEW stakeholders
are - let's face it - accountants, it still irks.

As a journo I'm not owed anything by the ICAEW. But maybe in the
context of its members, and its role in making reporting as clear as
possible, perhaps such an important ‘number' deserved more pronounced
presentation.

And while on the topic, it also seems strange that CIMA feels it
can't specifically reveal chief executive Charles Tilley's pay packet.

CIMA's annual review 2011 reveals its water consumption (3,400 cubic meters), but not the salaries of its senior management.

Some details are contained within the financial statements, but these
are anonymous. We know that the highest paid executive's dosh has moved
from the £210k-£220k bracket to £220k-£230k between 2010 and 2011. Is
that Tilley? Dunno, assume so. Has ‘his' pay gone up from £220k to
£220.1k, or £210k to £230k? A 100 quid or twenty grand? Dunno.

The average CIMA staff salary (wages + NI) fell to £33,349 from £36,224, with total staff numbers up to 426 from 369.

And of course, you're dying to know, the ICAEW does state their
executives' pay. Chief Michael Izza earned a total of £477,000 -
£372,000 in salary and £105,000 in ‘deferred variable pay', or
performance-related pay."

My thanks to Kevin Reed for his Tweet following my publication of this article:

Monday, May 14, 2012

"We have just published the ICAEW Annual Review for 2011, and as you will
see the headlines are positive. Member and student numbers are up and
income has grown, despite a tough economic backdrop in many parts of the
world."

Yet for reasons that are unclear he does not say a word about the pension deficit of £40M that completely undermines that finances of the ICAEW, and is the tail that is wagging the dog of the ICAEW's drive for new members via its international "strategy".

Friday, May 11, 2012

" the defined benefits pension scheme, which was closed on 30 June 2010,
is expected to show a £22.6M deficit as of 31 March 2010 following the
completion of an actuarial valuation.

It seems that funding
contributions of £6M a year for three years, followed by £3.5M a year,
will be made until the deficit is eliminated.

It is reasonable to
assume that the long suffering members of the ICAEW will be expected to
pay increased subscriptions to cover these funding contributions.
"

One year on, and the pension deficit continues to drain the lifeblood of the ICAEW.

In fact the pension deficit (based on a December 2011 desktop review) has worsened to £40.1M:

"at which level a trigger event is recognised on the covenant
agreement. The situation is being monitored to determine whether this
represents a temporary event and discussions are continuing with the
trustee. This review will not be concluded until after the date of
signing of these financial statements. At that date our estimate of
scheme funding was 82.5%, at which level we would expect the trigger
event to be deemed temporary.

If the red trigger event is not deemed to be temporary and the
covenant agreement is enforced, an additional funding contribution of
£5.0m to the scheme would be required and the funding plan reviewed as
to duration and size of payments; the current covenant agreement would
also end. Such a contribution does not have a direct impact on the
income statement and no provision has been made within current
liabilities owing to the uncertainty of the temporary event."

Be warned, by the sound of it there may be a major increase in subscriptions.

However, much like local councils, it seems that the ICAEW has found a way to boost its finances (other than just by increasing the annual subs); namely by levying fines. The retained surplus after tax for the year was £4.1m (2010: £1.8m), after receipt of £2.4m of one-off fines and recoveries of past
costs from the Accountancy and Actuarial Discipline Board (AADB).

Wednesday, May 09, 2012

I am pleased to see than Anton Colella (CEO of ICAS) is also less than impressed with Cameron's comments about accountants:

""People want to know that we’re not just a bunch of accountants
trying to turn around the British economy as if it were a failing
company, but that we’re resolutely on their side as we do,” said Prime
Minister David Cameron earlier this week.
It’s an unhappy irony that, in making an appealing point, Mr
Cameron should malign an entire group of hard-working professionals.

ICAS represents over 19,000 world-class business-women and
business-men. Now that’s just a – big – bunch of chartered accountants (CAs).

But it’s also a bunch of dedicated and passionate
professionals, working to serve clients and investors in the public interest.

It’s a bunch of business leaders, who head up some of the
biggest companies in the country, in public practice and in a myriad of
business roles, providing employment, innovation and tax revenue.

It’s a bunch of volunteers, who provide their expertise to a
range of charities across the UK and abroad with organisations like Accounting
for Development, an organisation which matches CAs with organisations in
developing nations.

I am sure Mr Cameron didn’t really intend to denigrate
accountants. However, the notion of accountants as uncaring bean-counters is at
odds with my experience of enthusiastic, hard-working CAs, whose energy and
insights and will be key drivers of the UK economy’s recovery.

Prudence is a watch-word for accountants; in reporting, in
auditing, in projecting. Prudent phrasing, in this case, might have helped
avoid one group of people feeling as though Mr Cameron was not resolutely on
their side."

The drip drip of negative comments about accountants, tax efficient
schemes, tax avoidance etc, that are coming from Osborne and Cameron,
are deliberately designed to play to people's prejudices about the
profession and about those involved in the "dark arts" of financial
advice.

It undermines the brand value of accountancy as a profession. We should
not simply roll over passively, like some pitiful Victorian clerk, and
let the politicians use our profession for their own political ends.

As I said a couple of days ago, an open joint letter from the UK's leading accounting bodies is required.

Plus members of the profession should tweet @Number10gov to tell Cameron to stop this nonsense, and make #accountinggate a trending topic.

"Izza should not be too surprised at the barracking about tax avoidance
and accountants from Cameron, Osborne and their ilk. Their background
means that their financial affairs are handled by trusts and
(ironically) accountants. They have no real world interaction with HMRC
or the "mundane" daily matters of the finance that the rest of us have."

Maybe an open joint letter from the UK's leading accounting bodies is required, or maybe Cameron's accountant should simply go on strike?

I have Tweeted @Number10gov to tell him to stop this nonsense, I suggest fellow members do the same and make #accountinggate a trending topic.

Friday, May 04, 2012

Accountancy Age reports that the council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) has voted (without any form of irony) for the establishment of international constituencies for
direct election to the council.

This of course means that the designation "in England and Wales" is now irrelevant and misleading.

Constituencies will be set up in regions and countries
where there are at least 2,000 ICAEW members, on the basis of one
council member per 2,000 ICAEW members.

As a result, constituencies will be set up in mainland Europe (one
member), Hong Kong (one member), North America and the Caribbean (two
members) and Oceania (one member) with a view to setting up further
constituencies in Africa, China, the Middle East and South East Asia in
the future once those areas hold enough members.

Needless to say budget allocations of members' subscriptions, because of this change, will at some stage be reapportioned.

Given that this is such a fundamental change to the ICAEW I am surprised that it was not put to the vote of the members.

I assume that the outdated Victorian trade association rule that states that members who wish to stand for election can only be nominated by 10 members within their region will remain?

Will the ICAEW in the future at least notify members within a region that someone wishes to be nominated, or will they still block that as they did when I tried to stand in 2007?

Tuesday, May 01, 2012

Fed up with the low level ongoing anti accounting barracking from the Bullindgdon set at the heart of government, Michale Izza (CEO of The ICAEW) has vented his spleen.

In a letter to Cameron, Izza says that, while such remarks may
be tongue-in-cheek, they undermine the significant contribution that the
profession makes to the UK economy.

Izza should not be too surprised at the barracking about tax avoidance and accountants from Cameron, Osborne and their ilk. Their background means that their financial affairs are handled by trusts and (ironically) accountants. They have no real world interaction with HMRC or the "mundane" daily matters of the finance that the rest of us have.

Georgie Porgie and Cameron need to be reminded of the wise words of Lord Templeman in 1992:

"There is no morality in a tax and no illegality or immorality in a tax avoidance scheme."

"KPMG says it “holds its hands up” to a human error at the firm that has led to its entire UK workforce not being paid on time.

Normally staff at the big four accountancy firm are paid on the
29th. If that falls on a weekend, as it does this month, they are paid
the Friday before.

But a human error has led to 11,000 staff having to wait until Monday to receive their wages.

A spokeswoman for KPMG told Payroll World that the problem was not with its supplier but originated within the firm.

“We hold our hands up over this, it was caused by a human error within KPMG,” she said.An email was sent to all staff this morning explaining the problem.

“We hope we told people in time to adjust any direct debits or
payments from their accounts if they needed to. Our HR and finance teams
are ready to help anyone who may face any hardship as a result of the
mistake,” she said."

"The survey also revealed that many employers were still relatively “low tech” in
their approach to payroll: a surprising 25 percent of respondents said
they did not use software to run their payroll, 22 percent still make
payments by cheque and nearly half (49 percent) said that their payroll
was not linked to their HR systems.

Over four in ten respondents (42 percent) said they had not
reviewed their payroll processes within the last year and almost a fifth
(18 percent) said they had not done so for three or more years."

I am a firm believer in creating an opportunity from a crisis (or in this case a cock up), this cock up provides KPMG with an ideal opportunity to review its payroll systems.

Friday, April 06, 2012

Both Economia and myself were asleep at the wheel regarding this error relating to HMRC interest rates:

"As was quite correctly pointed out yesterday, by a loyal and observant
reader, Martin Casimir's assertion that HMRC does not pay interest on
tax repayments is wrong. HMRC (as I noted in the comments section) does in fact pay 0.5% (perversely it charges 3% for late payments).

I wrote to Martin yesterday about it, and Bloomsbury have acknowledged
that they were wrong and will be asking Economia to correct their copy.

It is shameful that Economia (the professional magazine of the ICAEW)
and myself (an FCA) didn't spot it when we published Martin's quotes!

So well done and thanks for pointing that out, and mea culpa on my part for being asleep yesterday!
"

"Each week ICAEW receives complaints - from ICAEW
members and from members of the public - about individuals and
organisations who describe themselves as ‘chartered accountant(s)’ or
who use the letters ACA or FCA after their name when they are not
entitled to.

When we receive these complaints, we take steps to make sure that
the individual or organisation stops using the description ‘chartered
accountant’ or the letters ACA or FCA. ICAEW takes these cases very
seriously because members of the public can be misled into thinking that
the individual is a qualified chartered accountant or - in the case of a
former ICAEW member - that they are still entitled to describe
himself/herself as a chartered accountant.

This page lists firms and individuals who have been brought to our attention in the last three years.

Firms

The following firms and companies have given an undertaking not
to pass themselves off as an ICAEW member firm. They are neither current
ICAEW member firms nor firms associated or connected with ICAEW.

Wilshers & Co

Haigh Hudson, Huddersfield

Compadvise Limited, London

Helrik Limited, London

The Really Cheap Accountancy Company, Salisbury

Paul Osborne & Co, London

Hill Associates, Studley, Warwickshire

Craig Callum Associates, Liverpool

Morgan Hayes, Cheshire

Re-accts, Stoke-on-Trent

KDL, Eastcote, Middlesex

Darbyshire & Co, Whalley, Lancs

Chase Henderson, London

ATC & Associates, London

Global Tax Accountants, Walkley, Sheffield

Wise & Co, London

Solar Accountants

Peter Tan & Co, South Croydon

Integra Global Solutions, Thatcham, Berks

Hammel Accountancy Services, London

Convex Capital, London

Anthony Prince & Co, Bromley

3Sixty Group Holdings Limited, London

Graham Ralph & Co Limited, Eastbourne

Young & Co, Middlesex

Individuals

The following individuals have given an undertaking not to pass
themselves off as members of ICAEW. They are neither current ICAEW
members nor individuals associated or connected with ICAEW.

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

"The ICAEW plans to "break ranks" with fellow accredited bodies and offer
statements of professional standing (SPS) to advisers who make a
one-off payment rather than requiring them to join as members.

The ICAEW has applied to be an accredited body, and expects to be approved by the Financial Services Authority in December 2011."

"The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has granted
ICAEW accredited body status under the FSA Retail Distribution Review
(RDR). The RDR requires all retail financial advisors to obtain a
statement of professional standing (SPS) from an accredited body by 1
January 2013 to continue to advise clients.

ICAEW will now be able to issue SPS to retail financial advisors who
have met the FSA’s new qualification standards and also monitor their
continuous professional development. This recognises ICAEW’s experience
as a professional body and regulator of the accountancy profession.

Vernon Soare, ICAEW Executive Director, Professional Standards
commented, “We are very pleased to be the first accountancy body to be
granted accredited body status by the FSA. The Retail Distribution
Review represents a significant change for retail financial markets and
financial advisors and ICAEW will now play a part in delivering an
enhanced regime for consumers.”

“We are committed to supporting our members and member firms in this
period of change and providing them with new opportunities” Vernon
continued. “This is part of a long term strategy to increase the
services that ICAEW offers to members and also to build on our consumer
focus.”

ICAEW expects to open its scheme for applications in April this year
when applicants will need to provide evidence that they have fully met
the RDR exam qualification standards, including any gap-fill
requirements. Further details of the application process will be
provided in due course. In the meantime, ICAEW members and employees of
member firms should continue working towards achieving RDR approved or
transitional qualifications, and meeting any gap-fill needs."

Friday, January 06, 2012

"This site is here to help you find out anything you would like to know
about the process known as audit - or to use its full title 'Audit of
Financial Statements'....

....www.trueandfair.org was created by ICAEW,
a world leader of the accountancy and finance profession, as part of
its public interest charter to advance the theory and practice of
accountancy, finance, business and commerce."

By the way, the ICAEW have not used the domain names www.trueandfair.com or www.trueandfair.co.uk, because they are owned by Omkar Joshi who is CEO of Company Reporting Ltd (a publishing business focused on financial reporting practices of public companies).

"Omkar's recent venture TrueandFair was acquired by Company Reporting Limited, a pan-European information service which reports on constantly changing corporate financial reporting practice; identifying actual year on year changes in the reporting practice and governance procedures of Europe's leading companies."